analyze_schedule_travel

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the analysis outputs (visit order, gaps, distances, care hours) and its purpose ('Identifies inefficient routing'), making the tool's behavior transparent. However, it does not explicitly state that it is read-only or describe any side effects, though this is strongly implied by the word 'Analyze'.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the verb and scope, and the second adds value by stating the analytical purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has no output schema, but the description enumerates exactly what it computes (visit order, gaps, travel distances, care hours, routing efficiency), giving an agent a solid idea of the expected result. It doesn't detail output format, but for a 2-param read-only analysis tool, this is adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds little beyond the schema. It mentions the schedule context but does not elaborate on parameter semantics, matching the baseline of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses the specific verb 'Analyze' with a well-defined resource ('a PSW's day schedule') and lists concrete aspects (visit order, gaps, travel distances, total care hours). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_psw_schedule or get_visits.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the tool is for evaluating routing efficiency but does not explicitly state when to use it over siblings or mention exclusions. The context is clear enough for selection, but there is no direct 'use this instead of X' guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.